What is belief? It is faith. Faith is only what you want it to be, and nothing else. This holds true in these situations where there is so little to support an argument, yet so much apparent support.

Well, *THAT* is certainly an airy statement... Anything else you'd like to explain to us?

Belief is what you uhh... believe. A lot of things happen in this world whether you *want* to believe in them or not, however. That would be the difference I tried to explain, evidently not very successfully. One of us is stupid.

maxheck:I realize why it's useful to label science and religion as equally valid. It's BSABSVR. The difference being, with one you have to show your work.

Your first sentence, yes!

"It's BSABSVR" -- no. That is where political divide kicks in. The difference is not necessarily showing your work, but what that work means. Right? Let's see...

maxheck:You can check things with the scientific method. Fourier and Ahrrennus showed the correspondence between atmospheric CO2 concentration and infrared forcing with their work, and a reasonably clever grade-schooler could make an experiment that checked that today, 100 years ago, or 100 years from now at a science fair.

Adlib using your context:You can check things with the Bible/Quran/Torah..etc. Jesus/Moses/Muhammed showed the correspondence between all that is good and all that is evil. Any reasonably clever Sunday-schooler should be able to check and reiterate that -- these days, 1000 years ago, or 1000 years from now.

Does that seem ridiculous to you? Because it was just a couple of dudes at a point in time that thought they knew what they were talking about and decided to publish their beliefs about it, all the while backing it up with the current science available at the time?

Since we believe past beliefs are true, the burden of proof must be on new beliefs which challenge those past beliefs. Otherwise, we all go to default values.

Here's my thesis:

-Progress through science cannot be achieved without challenging its preconceived notions.-Progress through religion cannot be achieved without battling for its preconceived notions.

OK, so here's the thing:When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

As an exercise I used an EWMA calculation (for short-term and daily temps) and regressed it against a long-term calculation via a Shewart style calculation chart (which is more useful for non-process-mean numbers and is more suited to expressing larger deltas in a QC-esque manner).Lacking the time, money, and computing cluster to feed all temps ever recorded into for a transform and a resultant output I will however say that the numbers for the period I fed in did not set off alarms (visually comparing YOY and YAY deltas).

I will admit, I am viewing it all as dead-simple numbers and have little or no atmospheric/meteorologic training so that may in fact color the entire transaction.Not sure, no data to go on as far as that goes.

In short, many here like to spout off about "the science!", but likely have no damned idea how that really works.Then, there are us engineers who typically sit by quietly and chuckle at the ignorance of most people where large-number calculations are concerned.We choose to sit by because when we speak up BOTH sides get sand in their collective reproductive canals, as-it-were. And that is tiresome.

Just a guy who knows science/numbers/that-kinda-crapola

/ymmv

*sighs*

There's no way you can "win" really. You'll be called a denier, skeptic, and probably a fear monger all at the same time. All while people base theoretical fixes on theoretical problems and declare themselves ordained. I think I need to drink more.

cameroncrazy1984:gja: When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

In what respect, charlie? What degree of warming would you consider a "small bump"? Keep in mind that a very very small change in the average temperature induces a change in the climate.

DesertDemonWY:cameroncrazy1984: gja: When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

In what respect, charlie? What degree of warming would you consider a "small bump"? Keep in mind that a very very small change in the average temperature induces a change in the climate.

Perhaps it is YOU who does not understand the science here.

guess we're farked then

[www.hprcc.unl.edu image 688x531]

You need to do a bit more work there on the whole "average" thing both spatially and temporally.

Hollie Maea:DesertDemonWY: cameroncrazy1984: gja: When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

In what respect, charlie? What degree of warming would you consider a "small bump"? Keep in mind that a very very small change in the average temperature induces a change in the climate.

Perhaps it is YOU who does not understand the science here.

guess we're farked then

[www.hprcc.unl.edu image 688x531]

You need to do a bit more work there on the whole "average" thing both spatially and temporally.

You can check things with the Bible/Quran/Torah..etc. Jesus/Moses/Muhammed showed the correspondence between all that is good and all that is evil. Any reasonably clever Sunday-schooler should be able to check and reiterate that -- these days, 1000 years ago, or 1000 years from now.

by the qualifications you just laid out, JRR. Tolkien has the validity of the Bible, and the point just passed you at 30,000 feet.

I am trying very hard to respect you, but you're not making it easy.

Given two systems, one of miracles and magic, the other that requires a reason that any doubter could ask "wait a miniute.... This sounds like bullshiat" and poke at it themselves, for whatever reason they doubt it, which one would you trust?

cameroncrazy1984:In what respect, charlie? What degree of warming would you consider a "small bump"? Keep in mind that a very very small change in the average temperature induces a change in the climate.

What they don't get is what a colossal amount of energy that is required to induce a global temperature change of 1 degree, nor do they understand that thermodynamics requires that energy to go somewhere. Everything is energy flow. If you dump energy into a system, the system readjusts to a new equilibrium.

And NO!!!!I don't give a ratsass if Obama isn't actualy at fault here. ( I know he's not ) It's just so nice to see a poo poo Obama headline make it thru all the vicious Red Piranas that attack anything that doesn't fit into their view.

And NO!!!!I don't give a ratsass if Obama isn't actualy at fault here. ( I know he's not ) It's just so nice to see a poo poo Obama headline make it thru all the vicious Red Piranas that attack anything that doesn't fit into their view.

ficklefkrfark:ecmoRandomNumbers: Last night was the first time since September that I didn't have to turn on the pellet stove. For the last several years, we've been getting our last snowstorms in May, but the summers have been getting hotter, drier, and shorter. The whole Phoenix heat island has permanently affected our climate up here in the mountains. It's all kinds of farked up.

Still beats living IN Phoenix.

/Flagstaff ftw

Flagstaff looked interesting, I only passed through there way back when one winter wish I could've spent some time there. Albuquerque, seemed pretty cool as well./Although the road between those two places was a black ice nightmare when we went through.

Can someone explain to me the "Algore" as one word thing? It comes off as some Oxi-induced typo that Rush Limbaugh made that all his acolytes glommed onto.

Igor (Algore) (or sometimes Ygor) is the traditional stock character or cliché hunch-backed assistant or butler to many types of villain, such as Count Dracula or a mad scientist or to Pres. Clinton, familiar from many horror movies and horror movie parodies .

cameroncrazy1984:DownDaRiver: Finaly, a "Thanks Obama" has made it to the main page!

Suck it you Leftist LibTards that try to rule the FarkWorld!

And NO!!!!I don't give a ratsass if Obama isn't actualy at fault here. ( I know he's not ) It's just so nice to see a poo poo Obama headline make it thru all the vicious Red Piranas that attack anything that doesn't fit into their view.

Whats important is that we remember that it was CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS who said that global climate change A) was not happening B) well maybe it is but we shouldn't do anything about it. If, and I'm just saying if, they're wrong on such an important issue, can we really trust their views on other issues?

DownDaRiver:cameroncrazy1984: DownDaRiver: Finaly, a "Thanks Obama" has made it to the main page!

Suck it you Leftist LibTards that try to rule the FarkWorld!

And NO!!!!I don't give a ratsass if Obama isn't actualy at fault here. ( I know he's not ) It's just so nice to see a poo poo Obama headline make it thru all the vicious Red Piranas that attack anything that doesn't fit into their view.

/now, go ahead, do your worst!!!//not subby

This is how you troll!

I wasn't trolling dipshiat

Start thinking on your own

Quit following the crowd

Um, he/she did think on their own and called you a troll, and now you'r trying to tell them what to think?Yea, read your own post they make no sense

tinfoil-hat maggie:DownDaRiver: cameroncrazy1984: DownDaRiver: Finaly, a "Thanks Obama" has made it to the main page!

Suck it you Leftist LibTards that try to rule the FarkWorld!

And NO!!!!I don't give a ratsass if Obama isn't actualy at fault here. ( I know he's not ) It's just so nice to see a poo poo Obama headline make it thru all the vicious Red Piranas that attack anything that doesn't fit into their view.

/now, go ahead, do your worst!!!//not subby

This is how you troll!

I wasn't trolling dipshiat

Start thinking on your own

Quit following the crowd

Um, he/she did think on their own and called you a troll, and now you'r trying to tell them what to think?Yea, read your own post they make no sense

Naw, he/she, just like yourself now, were just following the rollIts a pirana thing, you probably know it well

DesertDemonWY:Hollie Maea: DesertDemonWY: cameroncrazy1984: gja: When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

In what respect, charlie? What degree of warming would you consider a "small bump"? Keep in mind that a very very small change in the average temperature induces a change in the climate.

Perhaps it is YOU who does not understand the science here.

guess we're farked then

[www.hprcc.unl.edu image 688x531]

You need to do a bit more work there on the whole "average" thing both spatially and temporally.

how's this?[models.weatherbell.com image 850x637]

Better, but not by much. You need to understand that by only selecting bits of winter and spring in the Northern Hemisphere means you will tend to get lower temperatures. This is of course, completely expected.

jehovahs witness protection:Some dude wrote this same shiat on a cave wall 4 million years ago. Today, scientists corrected his spelling.

There is no climate change!If there is any it's purely natural! <- YOU ARE HEREEven if it's not natural there's nothing we can do!It's too expensive to do anything!It's probably more expensive to do nothing...

I lived in Nebraska and Colorado for several years. Got tired of white knuckle driving in snowstorms, so I stayed home and hibernated more. In the summers, I grew tired of wanting to pass out from the heat so I stayed inside soaking up the air conditioning, so six years ago I packed up and moved to Hawai'i.

Smartest move ever. I may have to deal with bugs and the occasional tsunami warning, but at least I'm trapped in my house all year long.

Because, you know, all the scientists are in the conspiracy together...or something...

gja:cameroncrazy1984: gja: Cameron, you ARE a galactic-class idiot. What degrees do you have you half-cooked egg?

So much for dispassionately looking at data, eh? What got you so riled up? Could it be that you can't defend your point on merit and thus feel the need to call me names?

I'm not even going to read the rest of the post. You claimed you could look at the numbers without emotion and clearly you lied.

Good. I get pissed at YOU, not the numbers. Numbers never lie. Sadly you cannot grasp that concept. GO blog and drink beer, that should work out great for a job. I am not "riled up" LOL, I just detest willfully obtuse ignorance.

FACT: the current dataset available to man as a race for numeric calculation of a rationalized and normalized analysis of temperatures is likely insufficient to conclusively prove beyond ANY question (via hard scientific methodology) a trend that clearly manages target deltas for earth temps as a true trend.We need more years, which we simply do not have. 1878 was the first year somewhat organized collection began via Army personnel, and 1890 was when dedicated folks collecting weather values were commenced.Considering the assertion of global warming is being put forward as a 'life-cycle' change the overlay of known lifetime for earth inception so significantly dwarfs the available dataset as to make it a questionable source.

You are free to disagree, but that would indicate you have already decided you are smarter than ALL the rest of the scientific community, and that is hubris.I don't claim to be a meteorologist but I understand stats and calcs and datasets very clearly, and I am still for someone to supply some unimpeachable sources and outcomes.

Because all the climate scientists are in the conspiracy together...or something...right??

I will be dead and gone before any of this impacts my lifestyle. I have no kids so I've already done more to 'save the environment' than everyone with kids who wails about it.

Even if I did have kids they would have to find a way to survive just like every other generation has. If what's needed to bring the planet back into balance is millions of humans have to die off and the survivors return to the stone age then that's what it's going to take. I'm not going to be here so I don't care.

If you think this is a selfish viewpoint, again, I don't care. 50 years after you're gone, maybe 75 if you're really famous, nobody is going to remember or care that you even existed. Your surviving family members aren't going to be sitting around the fire in their cave saying "you know, great-great ganddad or grandma recycled everything and had no carbon footprint. They told everyone to do the same but nobody listened!" Or, "great-great grandad or gramdma had a giant TV and drove a car everywhere that's why you kids are starving right now!" No, they're going to be too busy trying to eat again and not die from exposure to care whether you were a hero or a villain.

Or, they will have adjusted to the new climate and life will go on much the same as it has but with different energy sources or at a reduced capacity.

Either way there is nothing you can do.

Nothing.

Zero.

Nobody in power is going to do anything and even if they were and could eliminate carbon or greenhouse gas emissions in the US and Europe Asia is polluting a hundred million percent more. They don't give a flying fark about the environment.

If you think the pollution around cities and industrial areas in the US and Western Europe are bad I'd invite you to do a GIS for Bangalore or Mumbai or Beijing pollution. They have only become slightly more prosperous in the last 30 years and only around the large urban areas. They rest of the country is still living a primitive existence. The people in power and living the modern life are not about to flush that down the shiatter. For them reducing their emissions or slowing their economy with environmental restrictions means the whole country goes back to living that primitive existence and they're not going to do it for any reason. Eastern Europe and South America are pretty bad too.

Alternative energy is a pipe dream. Wind, solar, and geothermal will never produce enough energy to meet even the current demand and any possible future increase is right out. Unless there is research done at a Manhattan project level of funding and intensity alternative energy will never advance to the point of superiority and nobody is even planning on doing that. Again, it doesn't serve the interests of the people in power so it's never going to happen.

We need to use the current resources we have and make them as clean, efficient, and safe as possible then move on with our lives as comfortably as we can. You'll be gone before anything changes too much either way and the generations to come won't care or remember what you did or didn't do.

cameroncrazy1984:gja: When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

In what respect, charlie? What degree of warming would you consider a "small bump"? Keep in mind that a very very small change in the average temperature induces a change in the climate.

Perhaps it is YOU who does not understand the science here.

For a numbers guy - he doesn't know statistics. He should know that even the smallest variation could possibly show the Null Hypothesis void if that variation exceeds 5%. Or would he like to T-Test this b*tch out?

OK, so here's the thing:When you view the weather on earth as a purely statistical and numeric value, remove all emotion and bias, and proceed to produce statistic trends only on the math much if not all of global warming becomes an unproven and small bump in the smoothline of it all.

As an exercise I used an EWMA calculation (for short-term and daily temps) and regressed it against a long-term calculation via a Shewart style calculation chart (which is more useful for non-process-mean numbers and is more suited to expressing larger deltas in a QC-esque manner).Lacking the time, money, and computing cluster to feed all temps ever recorded into for a transform and a resultant output I will however say that the numbers for the period I fed in did not set off alarms (visually comparing YOY and YAY deltas).

I will admit, I am viewing it all as dead-simple numbers and have little or no atmospheric/meteorologic training so that may in fact color the entire transaction.Not sure, no data to go on as far as that goes.

In short, many here like to spout off about "the science!", but likely have no damned idea how that really works.Then, there are us engineers who typically sit by quietly and chuckle at the ignorance of most people where large-number calculations are concerned.We choose to sit by because when we speak up BOTH sides get sand in their collective reproductive canals, as-it-were. And that is tiresome.

Just a guy who knows science/numbers/that-kinda-crapola

/ymmv

Next, you should show us how 9/11 was an inside job because a cup of kerosene can't melt chicken wire with a cinder block on top.